Note : Les descriptions sont présentées dans la langue officielle dans laquelle elles ont été soumises.
D L'O~ WASIIING INNE:R SURFACl: Ol~`
TUBUr,AR PERMI;'ABI.E MEMBlRA~I~
Fl l~:LD OF TIIE INVEN'~'ION
The present ilivf~ntion relates to a method for
washing an inner surEac- oE a tubular permeable
membrane .
BACKGROUND OF T~ VENTION
In the case oE membrane separation process
using a membrane such as an ultrafiltration membrane or
a reverse osmosis membrane, solid materials in a raw
liquid adhere to the inner surface of the membrane with
the lapse of time and a so-called membrane
contamination proceeds. As a result, deterior-
ation in permeation performance o~ the membrane is
unavoidable. Thereore, the membrane must be
periodically washed ~o recover the permeation
perEormance of the membrane.
The efficiency of washing can be evaluated by
the degree of recovery of the permeation perEormance oE
the membrane, viz., the ratio of the amount of the
membrane permeated liquid aEter washing the membrane to
~ 20 the initial amount oE the membrane permeated liquid.
- Any criterion has not been conventionally established
to determine the efficiency oE washing and this
efficiency factor is appropria-tely determined in
accordance with various conditions such as the manner
of washing, the degree of contamination oE the
membrane, the period of washing, etc.
-- 1 --
'A~ *
:,
,
lA,~O tO5
Ul~l l`L~ ;cR'[L''~ 01~ RI\'~I'[NC',';
lig~ e l is a cross-sectior)al view
~ tra~ g all ~mbodimellt o~ the metllod Eor ~7ashing an
inner sllr.ace oE a tubu]ar permeable membrane accordin~
to the p~esell~ invention; and
Figure 2 is a yraph showing ~ne compaLison
between the rate of membrane contamination after
washillg in the example oE the present invention and the
rate of membrane contamination aEter washing in
comparative examples.
The present inventors have Eound that there
is the relationship such that the ~igher the eEficiency
oE washing is, the lower the rate oE membrane
contamination becornes, between the e~iciency of
washing (i.e., the degree of the amount of contaminants
adhered to the surface of the membrane aEter washing)
and the rate of membrane contamination after washing
(i.e., reduction in liquid permeation rate with the
lapse of time). For exarnple, referring to Fig. 2,
curves A, B and C each shows the state o~ reduction in
liquid permeation rate aEter washing when the liquid
permeation rate decreases to 9.~62 pm (liter per
minute; hereinaEter the same) in an ultra~ ration
apparatus using a tubular permeable membrane having the
initial amount o~ the membrane permeated liquid of
30.28 pm. That is, the curves A, B, and C show the
states after washing the membrane so as to obtain the
liquid permeation rate of 21.763 pm (the degree oE
- 2 -
l;Z~V~(~5
r ~? (. o v ~ ~ l y: c~ ~:)O l l t / '~! "; ), cl r t e ~ a s h ~ 3 t tl t' l~le l,l~) L l~l nC~ ~-, o ~ î ~
t~ obtai~- th~ liquicl ~ermeation ra~e oE 2~.60 pm (the
degree o~ recovery: abollt 3l~-), and a,ter washing the
membralle so as to obtain the liquid permeation rate of
28 3~7 pm tthe degree oE recovery: about 94~),
respectively. It is ap~arent froln the results that
slight increase in the e~Eiciency of washing greatly
contributes to preventing the liquid permeation rate
from lowering. For example, on comparison between the
curves ~ and C shown in Fig. 2, in the case oE the
curve ~, tlle degree oE recvvery is 81% and the degree
of eeduction in the liquid permeation rate after
washing (30 days a~ter) is 42% (the ratio oE the
lowered liquid per~eation rate aEter 30 days to the
liquid permeation rate immediatels~ aEter wasl-ing). On
the other hand, in the case oE the curve C, the degree
oE recovery is 9~ and the degree of reduction in the
liquid permeation rate after washing is l3%.
Therefore, the degree of reduction in the liquid
permeation rate can be decreased about 30~ by only
increasing the degree of recovery by 13%.
~s described above, in the membrane washing,
the more the degree of recovery in the permeation
performance of the membrane is increased, the more the
degree of membrane contamination after washing can be
decreased, so that it is possible to make the intervals
of washing oE the membrane longer to thereby minimize
the frequency of washing. This is convenient in the
)
-- 3 --
.
~. .,
1~()4~5
maintena~ e o(: m.~m':)ralle.
A metllod in which a chelnical ~3erlt i3 EilLed
in a tubulclr membrane to dissolve contaminants adhered
to the membrane is conventionally known as a method for
washin~ a tubular permeable membrane. In this method,
however, it is extremely difficult to reach the above-
described degree oE recovery near 100%. Therefore, a
further method i~ known in which after washing the
membrane with the chemical agent, a washing ball such
as sponge ball or the like is introduced into t`ne
tubular membrane to run it within the tubular permeable
membrane by a fluid baclc pressure. In this method,
contaminants adhered to the surEace oE the membrane are
rernoved by shearing force ~hereinaftec referred to as
"rub-washing Eorce") caused between the washing ball
and the membrane surface.
The rub-wa;hing force is expressed as
follows:
Al ( Pl-P2 ) /2A2
- 20 wherein Pl and P2 repre6ent upstream and downstream
1uid pressuees acting onto the washing ball,
respectively, and Al and A2 represent contacting areas
between the ball and the fluid and between the ball and
the membrane, respectively. In order to increase the
rub-washing force, the fluid pressure must be
increased. However, a limit exists to increase the
pressure Pl in view of the pressure resistance oE the
membrane. Further, there is an inconvenience that if
' :~ :
~ ~ - 4 -
:~
:,, ~ . .
, , ~ ;.
- :
... ,~. . ,. ~ . .
1,4~040~
t ;'~ r ~ c~ " e ~l, t ~ 'L o'tl r ~ t -?
C~i:L(`'~ On(i~ ]ly l.llCl^(?~'.l';~''S t(') tl~C?l~eby CallSC~ iEl~:iclllty
in l-i-~uid operati~n. rrhus, a lilnit exist~: to increase
the rub--~Yashillg force. ~n this case, it is also
dlEEicult to reach the above-described degree of
recovery near 100%.
Thus, it is diEEicult in the conventional
method for washing a surface of a tubular permeable
membrane to reacn the degree of recovery oE the
permeation performance of the membrane near 100~ and
the practical upper limit is at most 80~.
IE the degree oE recovery can be increased
even several %, the lowering oE the liquid permeation
rate with the lapse of time aEter washiny or the
progress o~ membrane contamination can be eEfectively
prevented as described above. In the prior art
methods, however, such a technical advantage has not
been recoqnized.
The present inventors have recognized such a
technical advantage and made various investigations on
a ~7ashin~ method which i5 capable of reaching the
degree of recovery oE the permeation perEormance of a
membrane at least 90~, preferably near 100%.
A method in which in the above-described
washing ball system, a pushing rod to directly transmit
external force to a washing ball is used instead of
fluid pressure as an external force which is a washing
force source is known as such a method, and this method
- 5 -
'' ' ~
. .
.,
1 is known as a washing means in the field of elongated or
deep vessels.
If this washing means can be utilized to wash a
tubular permeable membrane, it will be possible to perform
washing in which the permeation performance of the
membrane can be substantially recovered completely. As a
result, the progress of membrane contamination after
washing can be remarkably improved, and the total effect
obtained by the combination with the tubular permeable
membranes can be unexpectedly raised.
SUMMARY OF T~E INVENTION
Accordingly, an object of this invention is to
provide a method for washing an inner surface of a tubular
permeable membrane which can remove contaminants adhered
to the membrane safely without in~uring the membrane by
using a specific washing means.
The method for washing an inner surface of a
tubular permeable membrane according to this invention
comprises:
preparing a friction piece having a hardness of
from about 10 to 30 measured using a spring type
hardness tester according to JIS K6301, 5-2* (hereinafter
the same) attached to an end of an elastic rod-like
-~ 25 support; and
,
*Japanese Industrial Standard specifying a measurement
method and spring type hardness tester apparatus to
provide standardized measurement of hardness of
materials.
.
1~ ~f~ 5
1 operating the support to reciprocate the
friction piece within the tubular permeable membrane to
thereby act a rub-washing force of from about 0.1 to 1.0
kg/cm2 between the inner surface of the tubular permeable
membrane and the friction piece so as to remove
contaminants adhered to the inner surface of the tubular
permeable membrane.
DETAILED DESCR`IPTION OF T~E INVENTION
This invention is explained by reference t~ the
accompanying drawings.
In Fig. 1, A is a membrane module and comprises
an outer cylinder l; a plurality of tubular permeable
membrane 2 which are inserted to the outer cylinder and
are sealed at both ends to the outer cylinder with a
sealing material 3 (e.g., a thermosetting resin); an inlet
11 for a permeating liquid provided on the outer cylinder;
and a screw 12 for joint.
B is a washing device and comprises an elastic
rod-like support 41 and a friction piece 42 attached to an
end of the support.
The washing of the tubular permeable membrane
according to this invention is conducted in the following
manners.
,~
126()~05
~ chemical a~ent is r-illQd in a tubular per-
meable membrane in the state thât the membrane mocule is
connected to a pipe arrangement to thereby perform washing
with the chemical agent, the membrane module is separated
from the pipe arrangement, the friction piece of the
above-described washing device is inserted into each of
the tubular permeable membranes, and the friction piece
is reciprocated within the membrane by operating an elastic
rod-like support. In this case, the rub-washing force
acts between the surface of the membrane and the friction
piece, so that contaminants adhered to the inner surface
of the membrane are removed as the friction piece moves by
the rub-washing force, because the contaminants have
swollen due to the washing with the chemical agent. Depend-
ing on the kind of contaminants adhered, the washing with
the chemical agent may be omitted.
The rub-washing force must be within a range
from about 0.1 to 1.0 kg/cm2, preferably from 0.3 to 0.7
kg/cm2. If the force is larger than 1.0 kg/cm , the
membranes tend to be damaged, and if the force is smaller
than 0.1 kg/cm2, it is difficult to remove the contami-
nants.
The moving speed of the friction piece is
generally from about 0.2 to 2.0 m/sec, preferably from
0.5 to 1.5 m/sec.
:126V~V5
It is desirable 'or the friction piece to have
the hardness of from abou- 10to 30, preferably from 12
to 18, so as to prevent the membrane damage. ~aterials
which can ~e used as the friction piece are sponge, foam,
etc made of polyvinyl formal rubber, natural rubber,
butyl rubber, urethane rubber, acrylic rubber, etc. The
shape of the friction piece is usually a spherical foam.
In order to obtain the rub-washing force as
described above by using such a friction piece, the outer
diameter of the friction piece-is from about l.l to 1.4
times the inner diameter of the tubular membrane.
In the above-described case, if the contact area
between the friction piece and the inner surface of the
membrane is represented by S, the external force in equi-
librium with the maximum rub-washing force Tmax is
S Tmax. Therefore, if the rod-like support can transmit
an external force without bending even if the external
force is larger than S . Tmax, excessive rub-washing
force may act to arise a risk of damage in the membrane.
Therefore, it is necessary to use-a rod-like support which
has proper stiffness such that the rod may elastically
bend by external force substantially equal to the above-
described external force S ~max In general, a plastic
rod which is made of nylon, polypropylene, polyethylene,
or the liXe, or a spring wire, having an outer diameter
i~6~ 5
of rrom about 3.0 to 6~0 mm is used as the support. The
elastic modulus of the rod-like support is usually from
abou, 3 x 10 3 to 10 x 10 3 kg/cm3.
It is necessary for the rod-like support to
have its length slightly laryer than that of the membrane
module. The length of the module is generally from about
2.5 to 3.0 m and it is desirable for the length of the
support to be about 3.5 m.
This invention will now be explained in detail
by reference to the following Examples and Comparative
Examples.
EXAMPLE 1
A membrane module used was an ultrafiltration
apparatus having tubular permeable membranes each having
an inner diameter of 11.5 mm and having a total membrane
area of 65.5 m . A washing device used was a device com-
prising a nylon rod having an outer diameter of 4.5 mm
and a length of 3.5 m and a polyvinyl formal rubber sponge
ball having an outer diameter of 14.5 mm and a hardness
(JIS K6301, 5-2) of 15 atta~hed to an end thereof.
The membrane module was used to control a paint
in an electrodeposition coating line. The initial liquid
permeation amount was 30.28 Qpm. After 0.5 year, the
liquld permeation amount was decreased to 9.462 Qpm and
the weight of contaminants adhered per unit area of
- 10
1260405
membrane reached 11.4 g/m The tubular membranes were
washed with a chemical agent (a mixture of organic acid,
cellosolve, and a nonionic surface active agent) and then
a polyvinyl ormal rubber sponge ball was reciprocated
against each of the tubular permeable membranes at an
average speed of 1 m/sec. In this case, the rub-washing
force was 0.4 kg/m .
Immediately after washing with the chemical agent,
. the weight of contaminants was 6.9 g/m2, the liquid per-
meation amount was 21.763 Qpm, and the degree of recovery
was about 72%. Further, immediately after the reciprocation
of the polyvinyl formal rubber sponge ball, the amount of
contaminants adhered was very slight and it was impossible
to measure the weight thereof. The liquid permeation amount
was 28.387 Qpm, and the degree of recovery was about 94~.
COMPARATIVE EX~MPLE 1
: After washing with the chemical agent as in
Example 1 above, several polyvinyl formal rubber sponge
balls having an outer diameter of 14~5 mm were introduced
: 20 inside the rubular ultrafiltration module and were recipro-
: cated by reversing the direction of fluid stream forward
.
: and backward as the well-known feed flaw-type sponge ball
cleaning. Immediately after reciprocating the ball, the
~,
weight of contaminants on the membrane was 3.0 g/m , the
liquid permeation amount was 24.60 Qpm, and the degree of
recovery was about 81%.
t
,
~,': ~ ' ./'
'. . '' , ' : ,: :' , : . ' ,: ''
'i, ~ ,' , ' , ,' .: ~ :
:, 'J '
:: '. ' . : :
'.' ' 1. '"''': " ''
' ": ''. ' : ' : .
., ~ , . .. .
,,,':: : `:: : , ,
)40S
COMPAR~TIV~ ~X~PLE 2
Only w2shing with the chemical agent was performed
in Exam?le 1.
Lowering of the liquid pelmeation amount with
the lapse of time after wa~ihing was measured in Example 1
and Comparative Examples 1 and 2. The results obtained
are shown in Fig. 2, wherein Curve A shows the results
obtained in Example 1, and Curves B and C show the results
obtained in Comparative Examples 1 and 2, respectively.
As is apparent from those results, progress of
membrane contamination after washing can be extremely
suppressed by the method for washing tubular permeable
membranes according to this invention, as compared with
the conventional membrane washing method. Therefore, the
number of washing can be reduced and maintenance of the
membrane module is easy.
EXAMPLE 2
A membrane module used was an ultrafiltration
apparatus having tubular permeable membranes each having
an internal diameter of 11.5 mm and having a total membrane
area of 60.0 m . A washing device used was the same as
used in Example 1.
The membrane module was used to treat waste
water of water soluble cutting oil. The initial liquid
permeation amount was 43 Qpm. After use for 3 months,
- 12 -
.
i260405
the pe~ea.ion amount was cecreased to 24 Qpm. A poly-
vinyl formal rub~er sponse ball was reciprocated by
operatlng ~he nylon rod at a speed of 1 m/sec without
conducting washing with a chemical agent The liquid
S permeation amount immediately after reciprocating the ball
was 39 Qpm, and the degree of recovery was about 91%.
When the permeation amount was measured after use for 30
days, the liquid permeation rate was 33 Qpm and the degree
of reduction in the liquid permeation amount was only 16%
which was comparable to the value of about 13% in Example 1
(24.60 Qpm with the lapse of 30 days after recovering to
28.387 Qpm) and remarkably superior to the value of about
42% in Comparative Example 1 (14.19 Qpm with the lapse of
30 days after recovering to 24.60 Qpmj.
Thus, in the washing method according to the
present invention, the effect of remarkable suppression
of membrane contaminants after washing can be expected
even if the washing with a chemical agent is not conducted
in advance, depending on the kind of contaminants.
2Q Whïle the invention has been described in detail
and with reference to specific embodiments thereof, it
wil]. be apparent to one skilled in the art that various
.
changes~and modification can be made therein without depart-
ing from the spirit and scope thereof.
:
13 -
"~
, , ", :. :: . , -
.
,: . - . , : : .. : -
~, ; : -:
:'' . : :. ... ' ''.. ; '
